[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YlAuUpOZ4IVqZTFk@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2022 15:45:06 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-serial <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Gilles Buloz <gilles.buloz@...tron.com>,
Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] tty: Add functions for handling flow control chars
On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 03:20:07PM +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Apr 2022, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 02:39:52PM +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> > > Move receive path flow control character handling to own function
> > > and a helper.
> > >
> > > This seems cleanest approach especially once skipping due to lookahead
> > > is added. Its downside is the duplicated START_CHAR and STOP_CHAR
> > > checks.
> > >
> > > No functional changes.
> >
> > But it seems the change. See below.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > +static bool n_tty_is_char_flow_ctrl(struct tty_struct *tty, unsigned char c)
> > > +{
> > > + return c == START_CHAR(tty) || c == STOP_CHAR(tty);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +/* Returns true if c is consumed as flow-control character */
> > > +static bool n_tty_receive_char_flow_ctrl(struct tty_struct *tty, unsigned char c)
> > > +{
> > > + if (!n_tty_is_char_flow_ctrl(tty, c))
> > > + return false;
> > > +
> > > + if (c == START_CHAR(tty)) {
> > > + start_tty(tty);
> > > + process_echoes(tty);
> >
> > > + } else if (c == STOP_CHAR(tty)) {
> >
> > In the original code no 'else' was present.
> >
> > Perhaps it's not a functional change, but this detail has to be explained.
>
> Correct that the previous code didn't have else, however, there was return
> with the same effect. Adding this else here was no accident from my part
> but it is intentionally there to have no functional change for the
> START_CHAR == STOP_CHAR case!
Perhaps you can split this change to a separate patch with this explanation
given.
> > > + stop_tty(tty);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + return true;
> > > +}
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists